For our own selfish interest, if for no other reason, we must work with the 

 game wardens to enforce what is fair and right. That does not mean that we 

 should report every occurrence of which we do not approve, but, better, go to the 

 transgressor, and in a friendly manner, remonstrate with him and point out the 

 error of his ways. If he proves to be a hardened malefactor, then we need not 

 hesitate to report him because of fear that we may be considered as "snitchers". 

 We hold permits and are morally bound to uphold the spirit of the game laws; 

 we are more interested in the welfare of the birds and of collectors than anyone; 

 we are good sports, and we do not want to hold traffic with one who is not in 

 sympathy with such a simple creed. He should be made to behave or else be 

 kicked out of the nest before he causes the collapse of the whole structure. 



I cannot see any logical objection to taking reasonably large series of the 

 skins or eggs of fairly common birds, providing such series are really needed in 

 our investigations. What harm is done by taking twenty-five sets of Song 

 Sparrows when the average pair of California Jays probably destroys more than 

 that number of small birds' nests each year? Shoot the jays and call it square. 

 If you have a chance to make a trip to a good colony of sea birds, take what sets 

 you and your friends really need. A single storm does immeasurably greater 

 damage. But it is another matter if you go back each year and disrupt the 

 whole economy of the colony, or if you "clean it out", or if you systematically 

 take second sets of the larger birds. Such a collector could hardly be considered 

 a good sportsman. Maybe you have an unlimited permit, but that signifies 

 nothing when it comes to ethics. I think the majority will agree in judging a 

 man who, with a permit, takes four sets of eagles year after year from the same 

 birds, considerably less of a good sport than one who, having been refused a 

 permit for no reason of his, goes out and takes a dozen sets of common species 

 that he needs. We would all rather be arrested for speeding (providing we 

 escape being fined), than be accused of being a road-hog. 



In medicine or in any other profession, the unethical member has short 

 shrift, so why not adopt a code of ethics ourselves, and by the weight of our com- 

 bined opinions, force fairness upon those who do not relish it? For a start, I 

 suggest something after the manner of the following: 



To be strictly fair to other collectors and to the birds. 



To respect the property rights and prejudices of others, and not to flaunt 

 our right to collect in the faces of all beholders. 



Never to take second sets (especially of the larger birds which do not nest 

 a third time), except in rare cases where one is making a special study. 



Never to take, year after year, from the same birds, eggs of such large 

 species as are apt to nest but once each season. 



To limit one's annual take of eggs of the rarer and larger species to, say, 

 five sets, except in unusual cases, such as when one makes a single visit to a large 

 rookery, not to be repeated for a number of years: and to use moderation in col- 

 lecting eggs of all birds. 



To take only such eggs of game birds as are actually needed. 



When a nest is shown you by a fellow collector, leave that pair of birds 

 alone for all time. 



Do not encroach upon the favorite collecting ground of another when he 

 has prior "rights". 



When out with a fellow collector, apply the golden rule. 



Ship exchanges and acknowledge the receipt of specimens promptly, and 

 do not try always to "get the best" of the other fellow. 



Prepare all specimens so as to make them of greatest value, and use very- 

 thing collected to the best advantage. 



Discourage irresponsible collecting. 



55 



